presented by Amazon.

Good Tuesday morning, I'm Adrienne Hurst and welcome to your Playbook Daily Briefing.

You might have heard the stat already.

More than 250 new bills that would restrict voting are making their way through state houses

across the country.

In Iowa, Governor Kim Reynolds signed into law, a Republican-backed law that restricts early voting.

Georgia's House of Representatives passed sweeping new changes to its election laws this week.

In Arizona, one proposal would even allow the legislature to override the Secretary of State's

certification of the electoral votes.

250. It doesn't neatly break down like this, but that's like five bills per state. The legislation

would limit voting by mail and casting ballots early in person, set stricter ID laws, narrow the

eligibility for absentee voting. It really runs the gamut. And many of them are a direct

response to former President Trump's false claims that last year's election was rife with voting

fraud,

which cost him re-election. Now, the upshot of this wave of state-level bills is this.

It's putting a ton of pressure on Senate Dems to flex their narrow majority muscle and quickly

pass federal legislation to counteract state laws. I'm talking about bills like HR1 and HR4. Liberal activists see them as the

only legislative remedies to fight what they call a state-level assault on voting rights. But with

both bills falling to the Senate this year, there's just one thing standing in the way. You guessed it,

the filibuster. Here's how the party's progressive base is framing it for Senate

Dems. They're at a fork in the road with two ways they could go. On one path, they get rid of the

filibuster, or at least set it aside for voting rights legislation, so they can pass these bills

...